When Reading 140 Characters is too Big a Strain

Thursday was Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s birthday. In acknowledge of said event, US Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, Philip J. Crowley tweeted the following:

Now, one can question the efficacy of such a tweet, but the tone is clearly, as Steve Benen notes, sardonic and was decidedly not a heart-felt b-day greeting for the Iranian chief executive. It was, rather, a plea for the release of political prisoners and a way to keep said prisoners in the public discussion.

However, Sarah Palin apparently only read the first 34 characters and tweeted the following:

Now, I actually don’t think that she didn’t read the whole tweet nor do I think that she couldn’t comprehend the meaning and tone of Crowley’s tweet. Rather it seems that she is deliberately misstating its meaning and actively disseminating into the public—something that is far worse than misapprehension.

The reason I think that it is noteworthy is that I suspect that the notion that the Obama administration is “kowtow[ing]” and “coddl[ing]” Iran via sincere birthday greetings will probably become a meme on Fox News and on talk radio–the further dissemination of false information. This is unfortunate. It is one thing to have a different perspective on how to deal with a problem, quite another to make things up.

I may be wrong about my prediction of the development of the meme (although if anyone has heard or seen it, I would be interested to know about it), but I am not wrong about the essence of what Palin did.

Related Posts:

About Steven L. TaylorSteven L. Taylor is Professor and Chair of Political Science at Troy University. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging at PoliBlog since 2003.
Follow Steven on Twitter

I’m not willing to accept any sort of admonition or indignation toward Palin’s response here, when such admonition/indignation was not equally applied to the same tactics as used by liberals for years with impunity. In fact, MMFA have used this tactic – almost exclusively – since their very inception (and without a 140-character limitation, at that).

But, for the record: I’m not that offended by this one example, mainly because far more truth than hyperbole underlies Palin’s response.

You admonish her insincere response to a 140-character statement by the State Dept, but apparently fail to recognize the 140-character limitation of her response. In other words: just as Crowley’s 140-character brevity loses a bit in translation, so does Palin’s.

It’s pretty obvious Chip here has gobbled up the meme that Obama loves them muslims (AKA terrorists) which fox and friends have been pushing since day one. So it’s only natural that he has no issue with Sarah’s ridiculous lies…

For the record, I wouldn’t have tweeted anything if I was in Crowley’s position. It seems a bit weird to use such a silly technology for communication between highest levels of governments no matter what the message is.

I find neither of the tweets edifying, but don’t disagree with the notion that Crowley’s tweet has the simmering stench of cravenness about it. The U.S. shouldn’t be publicly begging like that.

Suggesting that Iran release political prisoners is begging? Really?

You don’t think that the Reagan administration didn’t have people saying that various hostages in Lebanon should be unconditionally released? Was that begging? Hasn’t every administration stated that when American are held that those holding those hostages ought to release them?

This kind of thing drives me crazy because it is the kind of thing that ought not have any partisanship whatsoever. And yet…

For the record, I wouldn’t have tweeted anything if I was in Crowley’s position. It seems a bit weird to use such a silly technology for communication between highest levels of governments no matter what the message is

I think that that is a fair point. On the other, I am not sure it is radically different than a press release or a statement issued at a press conference.

@Steven: are you engaging in a bit of intentional mischaracterization of my statements, or your own brand of reading comprehension issues? I clearly stated:

But, for the record: I’m not that offended by this one example, mainly because far more truth than hyperbole underlies Palin’s response.

I’m completely unsure how you glean from that statement the response you made. Let’s break it down logically:

…I’m not that offended by this one example…

…clearly implies some degree of offense at her response.
mainly because far more truth than hyperbole underlies Palin’s response
…clearly implies that my reaction to her response is based entirely on the content of that response, and has absolutely nothing to do with MMFA.

My statement regarding MMFA is intended to elucidate the double-standard of one who would call out Palin, but who has continually failed to call out the likes of MMFA, for the very same issue. My statement placed your comments into context, not Palin’s – quite simply, because I will not accept the sincerity of such comments in such context.

Steven: Twitter just seems like an unserious mode of communication, unlike traditional things like press releases. At least he didn’t use smilies or “LOL”! I may be outside the mainstream about it these days, though. I’m over 40 so clearly not hip.

I rarely check out MMFA, but when I have, I’ve never seen them get their facts wrong. They obviously do more fact-checking of conservative media, but that’s different. If you want to convince us, Chip, you should probably link to them for evidence. Especially since you claim they’re notorious about it. (I always assumed they were a right-wing bogeyman like ACORN.)

You claim I’m lying because I said that I don’t watch Fox (or any other) news, which you attempt to prove by pointing out that I am responding to a blog post, that requires me to “watch” my computer screen?

To be honest, if I were to address the content, my thoughts would be fairly similar to Reid. Twitter isn’t a great medium for reasoned, well-thought-out political discussion and debate. It’s also not a great medium for the State Department, in much of any capacity.

Chip, for one thing, I find your analogy between Palin and MMFA unconvincing, given that you do not provide any examples of MMFA’s alleged malfeasance.

For another, do MMFA posts get anywhere near the mainstream media attention that Palin’s every utterance gets? Of course not. Thus, it is completely reasonable to spend more time criticizing Palin’s disinformation.

While I agree with Steven that one can criticize intellectual dishonesty from a top contender for the presidency while ignoring same from a third rate website, the fact of the matter is that there are dozens of posts on OTB over the years taking issue with Media Matters.

Take a look at any of MMFA’s treatments of, say, anything Rush Limbaugh says (they love to try to find alleged “gotcha” quotes from his show), and compare it to this situation.

As to your second point: if you want to critique Palin’s full-length articles or blog posts, and render the same criticism as is found in this blog post, then that’s another matter entirely. It would raise an interesting question, though: do her full-length writings elicit the same criticisms? If not, perhaps this treatment/criticism of her Tweets is lacking in some context?

1) Still no concrete examples. Very lazy on your part. Even James Joyner has done a better job of providing specific examples (not particularly convincing ones, but at least it’s something).

2) I was discussing your comparison of Palin vs MMFA. Now you’re moving the goal posts to a discussion of Palin’s tweets vs Palin’s blog. Do you actually have a point you’re trying to make? You’re all over the place. Maybe it would help if you tried to restate your case more clearly.

First, I’ve used the word “public” in each comment. There are back channels.

Second, the communications need to be appropriate to the recipient. The Iranian leadership is an enemy, and more importantly it’s President blames U.S. interference for all of the country’s problems and obtains legitimacy from his needed support through anti-Americanism.

Third, the tone and tenor of this communication is trivial, and uses birthday wishes in an ingratiating manner. If you want to find for me the Birthday card the Reagan administration sent Hezbollah to get hostages released, I’ll make the same complaints about it.

Fair enough–if your position is that the US government should only make back-channel communications in these situations that is a fair position. I am not sure it is one that has ever been followed, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a valid position.

I take the general point about tweeting, although I ultimately think it is really not that much different than press releases or sound bites from press conferences. I think that the characterization of this as a birthday card is unfair and I will refer you back to the original post in that regard.

And really, you are altering your argument from saying that such communications should only be back channel and then stating “If you want to find for me the Birthday card the Reagan administration sent Hezbollah to get hostages released, I’ll make the same complaints about it.” Either public pronouncements are bad or they are not. You seem to be arguing that public statement are bad in general, but then qualifying your position.

—
We want to see it [the situation] resolved peacefully and we want to see it resolved by the Iranians doing the right thing, which is letting these guys go,” State Department deputy spokesman Tom Casey told reporters March 28.
—

If Obama’s State Department had said that exact same thing about the hikers, Palin would have called it kowtowing and coddling. In reality, it wasn’t then, and it isn’t now.

Prof. Taylor, I listed three separate objections to the cominication. Whether or not the communication was made public, I would still find the tone and tenor of using birthday wishes to beg for release inappropriate.

BTW, do we even know if she wrote the thing? Just as Louis XIV his royal pants-put-oner, royal sash tier, and royal shoe buckler and so on, I understand that Her Nibs has a bevy of flunkies who write things for her.

Hilarious. Good ol’ Chip gets huffy at the accusation he watches Fox News — but apparently not only listens to Limbaugh, but listens so closely that he can tell whenever MMFA takes one of his quotes “out of context.”

Of course, to a dittohead, taking a Rush quote out of context means not prefacing it with “Oh, Rush, you are the wisest and most brilliant mind in the history of the world.”

If Twitter were around 65 years ago, George Kennan might have used it. Instead of the famous Long Telegram, his ideas about the sources of Soviet conduct could have been expressed in only 140 characters.